Originally published January 2019. Updated October 20, 2026.
Gillette's "We Believe: The Best Men Can Be" ad, released on January 14, 2019, split its audience and turned into one of the most-cited cautionary tales in purpose-driven advertising. The 1:48 spot reframed the brand's "The Best a Man Can Get" tagline around bullying and harassment. Procter & Gamble, which has owned Gillette since 2005, reported a large Gillette write-down in July 2019 and did not name the ad as the cause.
Part of EPR's crisis coverage. Related: crisis PR pillar.
What happened with Gillette's "We Believe" ad?
Gillette released the ad on YouTube on January 14, 2019, and the reaction split sharply within days. Supporters, including many younger viewers, praised the brand for taking a stand. Critics, including many of the brand's core male customers, said the ad lectured them. The table shows the sequence.
| Date | Event | Why it mattered |
|---|
| 1989 | "The Best a Man Can Get" tagline launches | Thirty years of brand equity sat behind the line the 2019 ad reworked |
| January 28, 2005 | P&G announces it will acquire Gillette for $57 billion in stock; the deal closes October 1, 2005 | Gillette's communications ran inside a large corporate system |
| January 14, 2019 | "We Believe: The Best Men Can Be" is released | The ad tied the tagline to the #MeToo conversation |
| January 2019 | Widely reported YouTube dislikes outnumber likes, and boycott hashtags spread | The debate moved from advertising trade press to general news |
| July 2019 | P&G announces an impairment charge of about $8 billion against Gillette | The company cited competition, currency, and shaving trends, and did not blame the ad |
| 2020 to 2024 | Gillette returns to product and sports advertising | The brand moved away from social-issue messaging |
Why was the ad so divisive?
The ad was divisive because it spoke to the brand's own customers as part of the problem. The cause it addressed, bullying and harassment, drew broad sympathy. The targeting drew the objections: many men who buy razors felt accused, while others welcomed the message. Piers Morgan, the broadcaster, publicly criticized it. The ad was made with the agency Grey New York, and the creative decision sat with P&G.
Gillette used a tagline it had owned for three decades and changed its meaning in 108 seconds of film. Brands that spend equity this way should expect the audience that built it to react first.
Did the ad cause P&G's Gillette write-down?
The ad did not appear in P&G's stated reasons for the write-down. In July 2019, P&G announced a non-cash impairment of about $8 billion on the Gillette business and cited competition from direct-to-consumer brands such as Harry's and Dollar Shave Club, currency effects, and a shift toward beards and less frequent shaving. Many communications professionals suspected the backlash played some part, but no public source confirms that, so the link remains opinion.
How did Gillette recover?
Gillette recovered by going quiet and returning to product and sports marketing. It did not apologize, defend the ad, or launch a follow-up purpose campaign. It put its advertising behind athletes and product launches instead, including sports sponsorships and the GilletteLabs razor line.
The figures on market share and quarterly sales growth that circulate for Gillette's recovery vary by source and should be checked against P&G's own earnings releases before they are quoted.
| Recovery move | What Gillette did | Lesson |
|---|
| No apology and no defense | The brand stopped talking about the ad | Silence can work when the cause is defensible but the targeting was not |
| Return to product | New razors and grooming lines led the advertising | Concrete product news gives press and shoppers something new to cite |
| Athlete partnerships | Sports sponsorships carried the brand voice | A familiar spokesperson group rebuilds trust with core buyers |
What does the Gillette case teach brands?
The Gillette case teaches that a purpose message must account for the people already buying the product. The cause can be right while the audience framing is wrong, and a short ad can change what search results and press archives say about a brand for years.
- Test purpose advertising with core customers before launch, not only with the audience the brand hopes to win.
- Decide in advance what the response will be if reaction splits, including whether to defend, adjust, or stay quiet.
- Rebuild with dated, specific product and partnership news that press and shoppers can verify.
- Accept that the original episode will stay in the record, and build a longer story around it.
Which other EPR case studies cover ad backlash?
These EPR case studies show how other brands handled creative that landed badly.
